The Repentance of Nineveh/2

The Repentance of Nineveh

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Full

The repentance of the people of Nineveh was sincere and worthy of emulation.

Sources:Bavli TaanitTaanit 16aAbout the Bavli, RadakYonah 3:5-10About R. David Kimchi, Ibn EzraYonah First Commentary 1:2Yonah First Commentary 3:6Yonah First Commentary 3:10About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Eliezer of BeaugencyYonah 4About R. Eliezer of Beaugency, Hoil Moshe

"...וַיַּרְא הָאֱלֹהִים... כִּי שָׁבוּ מִדַּרְכָּם הָרָעָה וַיִּנָּחֶם עַל הָרָעָה" – This verse is perhaps the best evidence that the repentance of the people was sincere and complete. The narrator says explicitly that they returned from their evil ways, and implies that it is for this reason that Hashem overturned the decree.

Sackcloth and fasting for animals – The Ninevites' inviting of their animals to join in their acts of penitence is meant to express the totality of their submission to God.¹ Several classical texts similarly portray animals as joining in displays of mourning and prayer.  See Judith 4:12-13 where man and animal alike oppress themselves and don sackcloth and Herodotus 9:24 where horses and pack animals participate in the the mourning of the Persians.

"וְיָשֻׁבוּ אִישׁ מִדַּרְכּוֹ הָרָעָה וּמִן הֶחָמָס אֲשֶׁר בְּכַפֵּיהֶם" – Shemuel in Bavli Taanit explains that the verse adds "אֲשֶׁר בְּכַפֵּיהֶם" to teach that the people went beyond the law to return all lost property (and not just its monetary equivalent), even breaking down the walls of their homes to return the original beams to their owners.

"וַיַּאֲמִינוּ אַנְשֵׁי נִינְוֵה בֵּאלֹהִים" – This approach might suggest that this verse attests to the people's returning to God and abandoning of idolatry (even though there is no explicit mention of destruction of idols and altars).²  They repented of sins related to both God and man.

"וַיַּרְא הָאֱלֹהִים אֶת מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם" – Bavli Taanit points to the people of Nineveh as a model to emulate since they did not suffice with outwards signs of submission (sackcloth and fasting) but actively changed their deeds, as attested to by this verse.

Shem Hashem vs. Elokim – This position might suggest that the name Elokim is associated with God's attributes of justice and is, thus, appropriately used when speaking of Nineveh who stands at the brink of destruction. The name Hashem, which is associated with Hashem's attribute of kindness, on the other hand, is fitting when speaking of the sailor's turning to God after beings saved at sea and by Yonah in his prayer of thanksgiving.³ As such, the shift in names does not signify anything about the quality of the Ninevites' cry or their connection to God.

What led the people to listen to Yonah?

• Radak⁴ suggests that the boatmen had reached Nineveh and testified to the wonders that had happened to Yonah in the sea,⁵ leading the people to believe in him as a true prophet.
• Ibn Ezra, in contrast, learns from the description of Nineveh as an "עִיר גְּדוֹלָה לֵאלֹהִים", that the people of Nineveh had been monotheists all along.⁶  As such, when a prophet of Hashem came to speak to them, they believed in him.

Repentance from fear? It is possible that fear of destruction was the main catalyst for the people's change of ways, but as their penitence was sincere and accompanied by a real improvement in behavior, this is not viewed negatively. The motive is inconsequential in face of the positive results.

Why was Yonah upset? If Nineveh was a model of repentance and truly bettered themselves, it is not clear why Yonah should be upset after the success of his mission.  This approach might   suggest any of the following explanations: (See Why Did Yonah Disobey Hashem for discussion.)

• Concerns about Israel – According to Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Radak, Yonah was concerned lest the immediate repentance of Nineveh cast Israel in a negative light, as the Children of Israel had refused to change their ways despite numerous prophetic rebukes.
• Mistaken assumption – R. Eliezer of Beaugency suggests that Yonah had actually not known that the people of Nineveh had repented, having left the city immediately after delivering his prophecy.  He, in fact, assumed that they did not change⁷ and was thus upset when he saw that Hashem had saved them regardless.
• Theological issues – Several modern scholars suggest that Yonah's misgivings had nothing to do with the quality of Nineveh's repentance, but with Hashem's system of justice as a whole. Yonah felt that repentance should not remove the need for retribution since justice requires that everyone receive their due. Atoning for or regretting one's actions should not change that

"וַאֲנִי לֹא אָחוּס עַל נִינְוֵה הָעִיר הַגְּדוֹלָה" – This approach suggests that this is only Hashem's secondary reason for saving the city, emphasized only to teach Yonah a lesson about mercy.

• R"E of Beaugency explains that since Yonah was upset about the possibility that Hashem might save the city even if they did not repent, Hashem tells him that even if that were the case (though it was not), Yonah should realize that mitigating circumstances might lead to forgiveness even without repentance.
• According to modern scholars,⁸ Hashem teaches Yonah that love might trump pure justice. Repentance removes the need for punishment because Hashem loves his creations and desires their survival.

Message of the book – According to this approach, one of the main messages of the book is the power of repentance. Everyone has the ability to change and avert punishment, even those whose deeds were so terrible that they otherwise deserved destruction.

Partial

The people of Nineveh did not repent fully.

Sources:Sages in Yerushalmi TaanitTaanit 2:1About the Yerushalmi, Abarbanel,Yonah 3:5-9About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel Malbim

In what ways was the repentance lacking? These sources differ regarding what they find problematic about the city's repentance, finding hints in almost every verse to some deficiency in the people's actions:

• "וּמִן הֶחָמָס אֲשֶׁר בְּכַפֵּיהֶם" – R. Yochanan learns from the word "בְּכַפֵּיהֶם" that the people returned only that which was in their hands, not objects which they had in their fields, treasure troves or elsewhere.
• "וְיִקְרְאוּ אֶל אֱלֹהִים בְּחׇזְקָה" – R. Shimon b. Chalafta claims that the adverb "בְּחׇזְקָה" connotes a certain impertinence.
• "הָאָדָם וְהַבְּהֵמָה" – The call for animals to fast and wear sackcloth is seen to be problematic on two fronts:
• Extortion – R. Shimon b. Chalafta similarly views the animal's participation in the city's self-oppression as an attempt to force Hashem's hand. The people oppressed the animals,⁹ telling Hashem, "if you have no mercy on us, we will have no mercy on them".
• Wrong focus –The external actions of fasting and donning sackcloth are meant to be secondary aspects of the repentance process, merely a means to the end goals of self-reflection, regret, and change of behavior. As animals are incapable of such actions, the insistence that they join in the process betrays a lack of understanding of what real repentance is.
• "וַיַּרְא הָאֱלֹהִים אֶת מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם" – Abarbanel maintains that though the people repented of their deeds (מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם) and fixed their actions in the interpersonal sphere, they did not do so in the realm of belief. They never abandoned their idols to worship Hashem exclusively.

"וַיַּאֲמִינוּ אַנְשֵׁי נִינְוֵה בֵּאלֹהִים" – According to Abarbanel, this verse does not imply that the people rejected idolatry and began to worship Hashem exclusively, only that they believed in the power of Hashem to execute His decree.¹⁰

Shem Hashem vs. Elokim – The chapter's continuous usage of the name Elohim, rather than Hashem, might support Abarbanel's claim.  While Elohim is a generic name for gods and can refer both to Hashem and to idols, Hashem is a proper name, referring to Hashem alone. The people of Nineveh believe in and cry to Elohim, but not to Hashem, because they view Him as one of many, not as a single, personal God.¹¹

"כִּי שָׁבוּ מִדַּרְכָּם הָרָעָה" – These sources might explain that this phrase implies that the people repented in some way, but that this was only partial.

Why was Yonah upset?

"וַאֲנִי לֹא אָחוּס עַל נִינְוֵה הָעִיר הַגְּדוֹלָה"

Why did Hashem forgive them?

Polemical motivations

Temporary

Though the people repented sincerely, their penitence was short-lived.

Sources:Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 4343About Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, Yalkut ShimoniYonah 3About Yalkut Shimoni

¹ See Bavli Taanit and Rashi who suggest that the people used the animals as a means of asking mercy from Hashem. They separated the mothers form their children and said to Hashem, "If you do not have mercy on these, we will not have mercy on these". The commentary attributed to Rashi explains that the people were saying: "Just as you have are known to have mercy on all your creations, have mercy on us as well."

² According to Ibn Ezra who maintains that the people of Nineveh had been monotheists even before Yonah appeared to them, this verse does not speak of newfound faith, but comes only to explain why the people were willing to heed Yonah's call.   He points to the absence of descriptions of abandoning idols as evidence that the people must have already believed exclusively in Hashem.

³ This is perhaps the simplest way to read Yonah's prayer of Chapter 2, but see Yonah's Prayer for other understandings.

⁴ See also Radak's father who goes further to suggest that the whole purpose of the storm and being thrown into the sea was that it provide a sign to verify his prophecy.

⁵ They told the people that despite their having thrown Yonah overboard to his death, he survived.

⁶ One might have come to the same conclusion from the phrase, "וַיַּאֲמִינוּ אַנְשֵׁי נִינְוֵה בֵּאלֹהִים" in verse 5.

⁷ As it is rare to find a prophet who successfully leads the people to repentance, the assumption is understandable.

⁸ See R"E Ben-Menachem, Da'at Mikra Commentary to Yonah, (1973): 7-8 and Prof. U. Simon, Mikra LeYisrael, Commentary to Yonah (1992).

⁹ He suggests that they separated the mothers and babies so that each would cry for the other.

¹⁰ Being polytheistic, a belief in Hashem did not reqiure any shift in their theological outlook.  In fact, that might have always believed in Hashem as one of many gods.  Yonah simply convinced them that He was really capable of destroying their city.

¹¹ See R. Tzvi Romm, "The Failed Teshuvah of Nineveh", in the Benjamin and Rose Berger Torah to Go Series (2015): 10-14, who analyzes the various changes of Hashem's name throughout the book and what these say about the quality of Nineveh's repentance. He suggests that the name Hashem is used when one has created a personal connection with Hashem, something the people of Nineveh failed to do.